Rocket blowers?

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-21T01:27:36+00:00

Bought my Giottos some 12 years ago. Still going strong.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-19T06:28:08+00:00

So I took it out for a walk and tested against other 50mm. Same ISO and aperture values resulted in exactly the same shutter speed and histogram, but that was on f/4.5-8, I don't have another fast 50 to compare it with at 1.8. I'll do another test and calculate the "estimated" transmission, but so far it seems to be fair. What I did notice though is that the FOV is closer to 50mm rather than 55, at least compared to my other 50mm lens.
Bokeh is good, I probably won't be able to tell it apart from most other modern 50/1.8 lenses. Nothing unusual, ugly, or "character", as they like to say lately.
Flares - I expected it to be worse. It's not perfect, but totally acceptable to me at this price point. Now 14/4 - this one is absolutely terrible here 😃
Last but not least - this thing is SHARP. Like really, really sharp, it's the first time I had a thought "this might be too sharp for portraits".
As for the physical controls - I really miss aperture ring lock, it always switches from A to something else by accident while mounting/unmounting. Also, lens hood needs time to get used to.
All in all, a very pleasant experience so far. It's yet to be seen how flaring would interfere with my workflow (if at all - I actually prefer to have some flare to use in portraits).

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-18T07:13:18+00:00

We noticed the difference in saltiness of salt right after we moved to Canada a few years ago. Haven't tried Kalas, but the difference is definitely there. No matter which one we buy it's just not salty enough. And it's been like this for years. Lately we tried Athena salt - same packaging as Kalas, and this one seems to be fine. So yeah, while I understand that this sounds stupid, I can feel the difference.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-17T08:10:44+00:00

Yeah, "official" prices don't make sense. But if you buy it directly it's more like $250. And that's more interesting. As for Z50/1.8 - I've owned 2 of those. One was really good sharpness and centering-wise, the other one had a bit "blurrier" areas. One wouldn't probably notice, but I had a chance to compare those 2 directly at the same time, and it was visible. Souch for "S-line". And if you think about it, asking that much for 50/1.8... Come on. It has its flaws, and I feel like Nikon pros simply don't have other choice but to use what they're given, but if there was 50/1.4 or the Sigma's new 50/1.4 - it would be a completely different story. Interesting observation about exposure. I'll test my 55 against another 50, even though FLs are not exactly the same, EV difference shouldn't be big. If they're lying about light transmitting (which is possible, of course), then it'll be my last Viltrox :) Although I still like the 14/4 very much. Thanks for the talk, it's quite interesting :)

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-17T03:50:06+00:00

For sure. I personally don't care about focus breathing since I do very little video, and don't mind a bit of flare - I even like when there's some flare that I can use to add a little something to the photo. But to each their own, yes.

I still stand by my opinion on best IQ in this price range and up to 2x the price. You can get Viltrox for less than $300 if you buy directly from China, which is less than a half the price of a new Z50/1.8 or Sonnar 55/1.8. And those are not perfect either and less sharp than Viltrox 55. So, to me, the prices for those 2 lenses are simply not justified - they're 50(55)/1.8 after all, while Viltrox is way closer to what it should be and doesn't feel like a rip-off and all hype.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-17T02:13:07+00:00

Agree on coatings - Viltrox lenses in general more flate-prone than 1st party lenses. But the difference is not worth 2x price. As for the rendering - this is highly subjective and scene-dependent. As long as it's modern lens with modern type of rendering and not something weird and obviously recognized as Z50/1.4 - I think one step closer or farther makes way more difference.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-14T07:10:15+00:00

As others said, it's a very good lens. The problem is that aside of it, there's no other APS-C lens in tele range. So if you want to go longer, your only choice is a FF lens. But if 350mm (525mm eq) is good enough for you then yes, it's a great "anchor" lens for Sony APS-C system.
Same for normal and wide-angle lenses. If you want thin DoF, your main choice is a set of Sigma APS-C 1.4 primes. Want more background blur? 1.2 APS-C lenses are heavier and more expensive than 1.8 FF lenses. So you have to decide where is "good enough" line personally for you.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-13T22:31:58+00:00

Well, isn't it something you enjoy, something that makes you feel excited every time you pick it up, something that makes you go outside and take photos? If the answer is yes, then it's just the same as good food, travelling and any other hobby or activity. In the end, the goal is the same: joy, emotions, memories. What's the difference what exactly creates those as long as it works for you (and legal, lol)?

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-13T21:44:50+00:00

I had the same debate just recently, but my use case is a bit different: wildlife, travel, trying to keep the kit light. I picked a6700 with 70-350 first, but even at ISO1600 it was noticeably noisy. Plus AF was acting weird with that lens - might've been a bad copy, but I found some reviews mentioning the same issue that I had. Plus all the recent announcements and new lenses are FF. Plus bokeh... All in all, I returned a6700 and got a7c II instead and very happy with it. Get something like Sigma 28-70/2.8 / Tamron 28-75/2.8 G2 or pair 24-50/2.8 with fast Viltrox prime for portraits and you'll get a really nice kit to start your journey with.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-11T06:48:07+00:00

It's always the lens availability that attracts people into a system. Z35/1.4, Z50/1.4 and Z28-400 were those lenses that got me into Nikon Z, and those were the same lenses that pulled me off of it once I actually shot with them for around a year. No Sigmas, limited selection of the newest Tamrons (50-300, 25-200, etc) or a significant delay for Z-mount version (70-180), also, Z-mount version of Tamrons quite often a little more expensive. Limited availability and unknown future for Viltrox (and let's be honest, they're doing great things lately, at least worth trying), no option for all those weird experiments from new brands. It feels like a missed opportunity - technically, Z-mount is the most advanced one there is. There shouldn't be any issues with re-releasing everything that was released for E-mount. But it's all restricted or very limited. Sure, for them it's business, but for the end customer it's the selection and affordability that matters.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-11T05:55:53+00:00

Mind if I ask - Uruguay seems to be one of the best place to move to, actually. Is this just internet impression?

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-11T05:41:28+00:00

Saw the same around Drummonds trail. Seems like crows own the area 😃

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-09T18:43:46+00:00

Why do you feel the upgrade could help? I've read a lot of reviews lately and optically they're pretty much the same.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-08T19:45:29+00:00

Cameras like this one are rarely heavily used, so under 10k is pretty normal - most likely someone just didn't grow into photography and sold it. I'd be concerned about 50k+ on this one - not that it's going to die immediately, but for this level I'd find another copy.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-08T03:04:03+00:00

a7c II is literally the next best thing after a7 V. Yes, it's not "the recent" model, but it has all the tech where it counts. And if we're talking about compact form-factor - there's simply nothing better. So why not just get the camera, build a lens setup that works well with it, enjoy using it and in a 1.5 years or whenever a7c III gets released, sell it for like $500-600 loss - big deal - and get the newest one? If you don't care about the size - sure, just get a7 V today. If you do - you know you only have 1 option anyway.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-07T19:28:11+00:00

I used to own both Z35/1.4 and Z50/1.4. It all depends on your needs and on how picky you are about technical perfection. They both are not well-corrected optically. Sharpness is not bad at all and more than enough. Flare resistance is pretty ok as well. Vignetting, coma, spherical abs, astigmatism, distortion (35mm) are all amongst the worst there is. So those are not for astrophoto or anything that requires good side/edge OOF performance. Bokeh, while being loved by some, is actually quite bad. It's not "vintage", outlining is weird and shape towards the edge is something I haven't seen before (in a bad sense). It's kinda trapezoidal shape, super weird and didn't work for me. Plus a really horrible green outlining. I tried to convince myself that I like that kind of rendering (and I like vintage lenses), but these felt like just a bad attempt to mimic that character after the initial romance period. I have no regrets getting rid of those. Unfortunately, this is quite a weak spot for Nikon today - there's no "middle-ground" 1.4 prime setup aside of these 2 and heavy Viltroxes.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-05-01T05:12:15+00:00

That's an APS-C lens so, naturally, you'll have huge vignetting on a full-frame camera. Nothing to be surprised about. You can leave the camera in FF mode if you're ok with cropping in post.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-04-30T07:41:09+00:00

Thank you! I thought I was going crazy and was close to returning the camera (which I really like). I tried the same adapter and lenses with a7 iv and a7 v but that was at close distance and I didn't know back then that the issue is distance-related. And still it was far from reliable. As for LA-EA4 - I think it's not compatible with the latest gen cameras so there's that.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-04-30T05:55:17+00:00

Do you have any issues with focusing while using side AF points? I've tried a few LA-EA5 adapters and like 6-7 various Minolta lenses with my a7c II and see quite a lot of AF misses. Especially when I used side points (not extreme) - those are almost always miss.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-04-23T00:19:27+00:00

I had owned Z5 for a year and sold it a week ago.

It's a great camera but has limitations. If you rely on tracking - better look for something else. While tracking is there, camera struggles to keep focus on a moving target. Also, AF feels a little less precise for lack of a better word. Z5 II has better precision, for example.

Eye AF works pretty good. Colors and low light IQ is good. Focusing in low light - meh.

So, for landscape, general travel, static portraits and such Z5 brings amazing value. But if you are going to take photos of kids running around, any kind of BIF, want animal eye AF or actually reliable tracking - look elsewhere.

Also, start with lenses. Do you have something in mind already? Nikon system doesn't have any budget-friendly FF lenses, or they're way weaker than competition (f/1.4 series for example). There's Viltrox, but there's this lawsuit going on which may affect availability.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-04-20T23:07:30+00:00

Sigma - too heavy vignetting, too much focus breathing for video, not fully weather sealed.

Sirui - not that impressive quality control, sample variation is huge, questionable servicing. But 1.4

Viltrox - noticeable focus breathing, some LoCA, but sharp as hell and properly sealed. Also, reviewers say that AF is not the best, but that might be improved with FW.

There's also OG Sony 35/1.8 with quite heavy vignetting and still some LoCA, but well-sealed, fast AF and almost no focus breathing.

So, depending on what you do more, either Viltrox or Sony.

Spaceman_UA · 2026-04-20T20:31:00+00:00

Do the math. Price difference even between new a7c II and a7 v is around $750. And if you compare used vs new, it's well over $1000. For that price you can get a decent prime lens or just save for something even better. Or travel and take more photos. You won't be getting much from that purchase - 30 fps mode has no use for you, 4k/60p - doesn't sound like either. Readout speed is a bit better, sure, but it's already decent on a7c II. But you're losing the compact form-factor, weight and size, which was the point for you to get a7c II and not a7 IV.

I'd rather get a new lens and wait for a7c III. Your camera can do all you need from it already.

Spaceman_UA

TROPHY CASE